Traded Jaeger O'Meara [traded to Hawthorn for pick 10 and GWS's 2017 2nd rd pick] - Part 2

[cryptor]

Some people are talking as if Jaegar's knee concern is a completely unknown variable. Hawthorn have done their due diligence and done a medical on him. Yes, that doesn't mean there's any guarantees he'll make it back but on available evidence (ie. Hawthorn being prepared to "sell the farm to get him", Gold Coast offering him a $4.5M over 5 years contract, and his strong form in his brief come back game in the NEAFL) you'd have to think he's a fairly good chance of making it back.

Hawthorn made a similar call on Ryan Burton who hadn't played in 2 years due to his terrible knee injury but has since looked very good in all his games at AFL. All Hawthorn had to go on was their medical of him and how he looked when he was training in SA.

 

[Suma Magic]

The title of the thread needs to be changed to reflect the actual deal.

 

[YEMOC NAYR]

lol Landsberger blocked me on Twitter for telling him I wanted to drink his bitter tears when we won a game late on in the season that he clearly didn't want us to win.

Unprofessional git. He and Robbo are cut from the same cloth.

what the **** did I just read

 

[Prudster]

I think you'd be safer gambling on 1 x First Round and 2 x Second Round picks producing more games than JOM, yes. Hawthorn probably has the list (at the moment) to make that gamble, but its most definitely a risk.

Also keep in mind Richmond as a team where the top 5-6 are quality players, but a lack of talent around them hamstrings their chances of success.

Hurling People Now has a pretty good write-up as to the value of various draft picks in terms of average games played (adjusted for quality of games as well) versus player value, and mentions the JOM trades.

https://hurlingpeoplenow.wordpress....-hawthorn-dropped-their-jaegerbomb-afltrades/

With all due respect, that article has serious flaws with regards to the way it values players and picks. I get that you brought it up as a point of interest, but the reality is that trying to take into account his injury with no medical knowledge, and having not examined him, really makes it useless imo.

But back to your first paragraph, how many games they produce is not exactly the best measure. If JOM plays games, it's likely they will be of a much higher quality than the players taken with those picks. Historically, those picks combined will get you an elite player maybe one draft out of every four. The expected return from them is one solid player, maybe two if you're lucky.

Richmond are an interesting team to choose to compare. There's a strong argument that the reason they are missing that second level of talent is because they haven't traded and instead went to the draft. Since 2010 they've used a first round pick every year resulting in: Conca (6), B.Ellis (15), Vlastuin (9), Lennon (12), C.Ellis (12), and Rioli (15). And that's the danger of the draft. It seems safer, because first round picks almost always get 5+ years on your list and thus often play a fair amount of games, but it's a complete crap shoot when it comes to finding elite, core type players.

As for Richmond being unable to find support players to fill in the gaps, that is something Hawthorn have probably done better than anyone in recent history. Once you build that elite core, which usually requires a lot of top 5-10 draft picks and/or some incredible luck, filling in the gaps requires a lot less resources. And that seems to be Hawthorn's list management strategy. Build an elite core first, because filling in the gaps is a lot easier than doing it the other way around.

The way i look at it, we're about a 25% chance of getting an elite player with those picks. As long as JOM stays fit/becomes elite more than 25% of the time, then he's a less risky prospect than the draft picks. I would imagine Hawthorn have evaluated him be be at least 50-60+% (probably more, but i have no clue) chance to do that, which imo, more than makes up for the potential output of any non-elite players that come from those picks. We can get players of the expected quality of the picks in other ways. We almost certainly can't get a JOM level player without super early draft picks, a big trade, or some ridiculous luck.

 

[Verdun]

what will happen with those picks!?!

 

[Alley oops]

OK - so its seems Hawk fans are brown panting over Jaeger's knee .............. I know would be!

If he gets back on the park then at the very least you will have a good ordinary player at your disposal

Yes, agreed most have some degree of concern as I do. My response was more around your comment that 17 other clubs passed on him. Come on, we know that's not true. GC wanted him as a minimum and there was so comment here about how Essendon should take him for the good of mankind and world peace- they definitely wanted him. Interstate clubs didn't bother because he made it clear he didn't want to go outside of Victoria. And there was over 520 pages of love, lust, suspense and drama. One minute Hawks should pay 2 first rounders plus a best 22 then once we got him we overpaid I won't go because you know all that and it's all fun and distracts us from the what pays the bills for a few minutes. Best of luck next year for the Saints.

 

[faible]

picks. Historically, those picks combined will get you an elite player maybe one draft out of every four. The expected return from them is one solid player, maybe two if you're lucky.

If you read the background to the way HPN values picks versus players, it's using expected games as a way of providing a single measure that includes quality (so a pick 1 may play 100 games at 1.5x the quality of pick 20, therefore valued at 150 games).

He valued JOM as around worth ~180 games which is probably a reasonably fair value I'd have though?

I agree that the chances of getting an 'Elite' player through the draft is lesser than picking one up who's already a known quantity, but you also need good but non-Elite players for a side to perform, and that's where your second round selections add their value.

I think Richmond also provides an example of poor draft choices (in the past at least), Hawthorn haven't shown to be as unreliable at the draft board, and thus I'd expect them to pick less busts out of the three selections sent to the saints for example.

As I said, I think it's a big gamble, and one that not every club is in the list position to make. I have friends that work at Hawthorn so I have no particular interest in seeing them fail, and it would be great to see JOM become the player everyone hoped he would be, because I get the feeling the previous Suns medical department have had a big part in why he had the original injury.

 

[Prudster]

If you read the background to the way HPN values picks versus players, it's using expected games as a way of providing a single measure that includes quality (so a pick 1 may play 100 games at 1.5x the quality of pick 20, therefore valued at 150 games).

He valued JOM as around worth ~180 games which is probably a reasonably fair value I'd have though?

Yep, i read through it, as well as what considerations went into rating JOM specifically, and i still believe there are many flaws in the valuation process. For the record, their system valued Brad Hill's fair value at pick 5, which is higher than what they rated JOM. The problem is that no statistic can ever properly evaluate JOM's specific injury history, nor how that will affect him in the future. Hill seems to be overrated based on the fact that he played a lot of games early, whereas JOM lost a lot of value due to missing a couple of years. There are also so many factors that can never be put into a statistic.

I think it's a nice guideline, but there are too many assumptions and unknowns involved in the valuation process for me to take it too seriously. I'm not sure there's anyone involved with football that would trade pick 5 for Brad Hill. Either everyone is completely wrong, or the statistics have a huge margin of error.

I agree that the chances of getting an 'Elite' player through the draft is lesser than picking one up who's already a known quantity, but you also need good but non-Elite players for a side to perform, and that's where your second round selections add their value.

I think Richmond also provides an example of poor draft choices (in the past at least), Hawthorn haven't shown to be as unreliable at the draft board, and thus I'd expect them to pick less busts out of the three selections sent to the saints for example.

As I said, I think it's a big gamble, and one that not every club is in the list position to make. I have friends that work at Hawthorn so I have no particular interest in seeing them fail, and it would be great to see JOM become the player everyone hoped he would be, because I get the feeling the previous Suns medical department have had a big part in why he had the original injury.

Like i said, looking at Hawthorn's list, and our recent drafting/trading history, if you think picking up good non-elite players is a more pressing need than picking up elite players, you have a very different view to what the Hawthorn list management team seemingly have. Neither is necessarily wrong, but the point stands that we regularly find good non-elite players through smaller trades, free agency (especially delisted), late picks, the rookie draft, and targeting mature players. What we haven't been able to find easily, except through top 5-10 picks and big trades, is elite talent that you build a team around.

I don't think we're necessarily better drafters than other teams, mostly because the draft is just too unknown. I think what Hawthorn do better than most teams is our player development, and identifying players who can play roles. And that to me is what Hawthorn are looking to do. Build our elite core now, and with our leftover picks in 2017 and beyond, we can find enough talented role players to contend. Unless we finish way down the ladder, i just don't see how we get access to elite players any time soon without making big trades.

I don't think our drafting is so much better than other clubs that we would expect less busts out of those picks. You'd have to be going at significantly higher rates to make a difference in such a small sample size. Even if we did get less busts, we're still extremely unlikely to get the level of talent we need to make a significant difference.

Assuming JOM is a reasonable chance of staying fit/becoming elite, i think he is a far safer option than the picks. I'd probably say he'd only have to be a 30-40% chance of staying fit to be less risky. He's probably 50-60%+, making it a huge payoff, safer, and a quicker return, imo.

 

[Vindicater]

Certainly....And goes some way to explaining the EFC coveting his services so heatedly.

Not to mention the ever-continuing week-long melt, since we signed him.

Has there ever been a bigger sook in AFL History, I wonder?

And you wonder why people think Hawthorn fans are dickheads...

 

[Procrastinator35]

And you wonder why people think Hawthorn fans are dickheads...

And you wonder why no one respects Essendon & Dodoro.

2 weeks of non-stop sooking it up to the AFL.

Then getting that pathetic flog Landsberger, to do all of your dirty-work, in that pathetic excuse for a rag.

 

[kirbatron]

Settle down mate - I was actually commending the Hawks for backing themselves and being able to bring in talent.

If you are that defensive now will be interesting to see how fired up you get after a few losses





Again I was not laying the boots in to the Hawks - no need to be so defensive; if you can not acknowledge the trading out of picks has some risks fair enough. At least you acknowledge '17 as transitional.

I agree you can only look on picks, drafts for 12 / 24 months, I respect the Hawks for having a the balls to get the players they want as all clubs do.

Seriously Hawks supporters CHILL - it is only discussion! If I say yep I respect the Hawks most clubs supporters would appreciate it when I also highlight the risk the amount of nastiness is not justified.

As you say well run clubs have a proficient long tem list strategy - the Hawks are doing it differently to the Saints I have never said one is right or wrong; I will say that the Saints are also displaying more than a proficient long term list strategy (McEvoy for Acres / Savage, letting Stanley go for picks and drafting in Bruce / Membrey / Brown/ Stevens to address need and have picks to go with) It could be said the Hawks have been risky and the Saints smart this is a statement not a criticism.

Hawks supporters learn to take a compliment (respect for getting in class in Mitchell and O'Meara) but also learn to have a conversation without being damn righteous others are able to point out risk (letting go of next years first round pick and O'Meara not having played for 2 years)

I really enjoy watching clubs and their picks / drafts over a period of time

Every strategy carries risk - does ours? absolutely... I've acknowledged this several times just not in the above post.

There are just so many bitter people on this forum (that dress up hate as considered argument) that hawk supporters' defensive mechanism against this is tongue in cheek cockiness... there are some good posters (like yourself) but they are rare in a hawthorn thread.

 

[kirbatron]

I think you'd be safer gambling on 1 x First Round and 2 x Second Round picks producing more games than JOM, yes. Hawthorn probably has the list (at the moment) to make that gamble, but its most definitely a risk.

Also keep in mind Richmond as a team where the top 5-6 are quality players, but a lack of talent around them hamstrings their chances of success.

Hurling People Now has a pretty good write-up as to the value of various draft picks in terms of average games played (adjusted for quality of games as well) versus player value, and mentions the JOM trades.

https://hurlingpeoplenow.wordpress....-hawthorn-dropped-their-jaegerbomb-afltrades/

Good post... we've had to pay overs for the upside, which could be phenomenal.

Just digressing - who do you think 'won' out of the Judd deal?

 

[faible]

Good post... we've had to pay overs for the upside, which could be phenomenal.

Just digressing - who do you think 'won' out of the Judd deal?

I agree; if JOM becomes the player he looked like he could be in his first couple of years, you'd look back and say the trade wasn't so bad, though with the depth this year it will be interesting to see how the Saints do out of those 2 x Secound Rounders in to the future, and where Hawthorn's first ends up next year.

The Judd trade is probably one I'd say was a bit of a wash at the moment, Carlton got an amazing player at the time but never had the team success because the rest of the list wasn't good enough to support him. Kennedy has been brilliant at West Coast, and with a few years left in the tank could still well be part of carrying them to a Premiership, but also hasn't had the team success beyond multiple finals appearances as yet.

A bit like watching Geelong when they went down to Sydney this year, Dangerfield (and Selwood for that matter) couldn't have done any more to carry the team, but ultimately without the players around him, a superstar didn't get them over the line. Carlton got a champion player, but they still didn't have a champion team.

Personally I think West Coast did very well out of the trade, especially if you compare against say the Dangerfield trade last year where Adelaide undoubtedly got short-changed.

 

[kirbatron]

I agree; if JOM becomes the player he looked like he could be in his first couple of years, you'd look back and say the trade wasn't so bad, though with the depth this year it will be interesting to see how the Saints do out of those 2 x Secound Rounders in to the future, and where Hawthorn's first ends up next year.

The Judd trade is probably one I'd say was a bit of a wash at the moment, Carlton got an amazing player at the time but never had the team success because the rest of the list wasn't good enough to support him. Kennedy has been brilliant at West Coast, and with a few years left in the tank could still well be part of carrying them to a Premiership, but also hasn't had the team success beyond multiple finals appearances as yet.

A bit like watching Geelong when they went down to Sydney this year, Dangerfield (and Selwood for that matter) couldn't have done any more to carry the team, but ultimately without the players around him, a superstar didn't get them over the line. Carlton got a champion player, but they still didn't have a champion team.

Personally I think West Coast did very well out of the trade, especially if you compare against say the Dangerfield trade last year where Adelaide undoubtedly got short-changed.

Yep fair call. Kennedy probably swings it in their favour given the rarity of elite KFs.

I'm sure some hawk fans will keep an eye on who is drafted at 14, 23 & 36.

I assume the club want to get a real good look at Sicily, Lovell, Obrien, Brand, O'Rourke over the next 12 months & make a call to trade or keep. If some or none of them come on then we will need to go to the draft & will be going back for a bit. We also will look at trading good older players that wont be part of the next pship side - more tough calls to come I expect.

 

[faible]

I assume the club want to get a real good look at Sicily, Lovell, Obrien, Brand, O'Rourke over the next 12 months & make a call to trade or keep. If some or none of them come on then we will need to go to the draft & will be going back for a bit. We also will look at trading good older players that wont be part of the next pship side - more tough calls to come I expect.

This I think is the key point; since 2008 in any big game the usual suspects of Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Rioli, and Roughead (among others) were always there to stand up and drag the team over the line. Without that group - really only Rioli still looks like he's going to go beyond 2017, Gibson & Hodge didn't look right this season - I think the younger players will be in for a big year in 2017 to dictate whether Hawthorn has to go down for a few years and rebuild a little via the draft, or whether another couple of Free Agents will be enough.

 

[Verdun]

Every strategy carries risk - does ours? absolutely... I've acknowledged this several times just not in the above post.

There are just so many bitter people on this forum (that dress up hate as considered argument) that hawk supporters' defensive mechanism against this is tongue in cheek cockiness... there are some good posters (like yourself) but they are rare in a hawthorn thread.

Cheers mate - reckon if you are in Hobart you are close to where I'm at; fair call the Hawks success brings envy....just trying to discuss not have a go.

 

[Prudster]

This I think is the key point; since 2008 in any big game the usual suspects of Hodge, Mitchell, Lewis, Rioli, and Roughead (among others) were always there to stand up and drag the team over the line. Without that group - really only Rioli still looks like he's going to go beyond 2017, Gibson & Hodge didn't look right this season - I think the younger players will be in for a big year in 2017 to dictate whether Hawthorn has to go down for a few years and rebuild a little via the draft, or whether another couple of Free Agents will be enough.

I'd definitely add Gunston into that group, with guys like Breust, Smith, Puopolo, Stratton, Frawley, and even Sicily also standing up in a lot of key moments and key games, albeit none of them are inside midfielders, which reduces the consistency at which they do it. Tom Mitchell has already shown he can stand up in big games at Sydney, and JOM is expected to do it. Burton also looks like he is capable of doing that, but it's still very early.

IMO what you've written is the biggest argument for targeting elite core players over draft picks. Without a group of players who consistently stand up and win you games, you will struggle to win a flag. If you find elite 10+ year players, you have a long time, and a lot of years of draft picks to find role players, and also pick up players like Burgoyne, Lake, Gibson, or Frawley, who are elite, or near elite, themselves.

 

[Apex36]

Some people are talking as if Jaegar's knee concern is a completely unknown variable. Hawthorn have done their due diligence and done a medical on him. Yes, that doesn't mean there's any guarantees he'll make it back but on available evidence (ie. Hawthorn being prepared to "sell the farm to get him", Gold Coast offering him a $4.5M over 5 years contract, and his strong form in his brief come back game in the NEAFL) you'd have to think he's a fairly good chance of making it back.

That's because in the AFL a patella tendon injury is an unknown variable given its rareness. The best data you could find would be studies done in America on the injury which is much more common in the NFL, and the numbers aren't pretty. On average it ended up that Patella tendon injuries had the worst recovery times, issues with muscle degradation, worst results for player performance after returning from injury, and a career expectancy of roughly 4 years after sustaining the injury. O'Meara has already been out for 2.
I know you said that Hawthorn have done their due dilligence, but if the reports are true that he failed medicals at 2 other clubs, it seems like Hawthorn is taking a massive gamble rather than working on sound medical advice.

Hawthorn made a similar call on Ryan Burton who hadn't played in 2 years due to his terrible knee injury but has since looked very good in all his games at AFL. All Hawthorn had to go on was their medical of him and how he looked when he was training in SA.

Didn't Burton have a (terrible) broken leg? I never heard anything about a knee injury with him.

 

[Apex36]

And you wonder why no one respects Essendon & Dodoro.

2 weeks of non-stop sooking it up to the AFL.

Then getting that pathetic flog Landsberger, to do all of your dirty-work, in that pathetic excuse for a rag.

Seems reminiscent of Richmond last year when they missed out on Treloar, although they spoked it up to the AFL and in the media simply because he didn't choose them rather than a questionable trade. Apparently nobody could choose Collingwood over Richmond unless some dodgy paper bag under the table type deal was involved...

 

[Procrastinator35]

Seems reminiscent of Richmond last year when they missed out on Treloar, although they spoked it up to the AFL and in the media simply because he didn't choose them rather than a questionable trade. Apparently nobody could choose Collingwood over Richmond unless some dodgy paper bag under the table type deal was involved...

You've gotta laugh at that moron Landsberger 's headlines: 'Dodgy-Deals', 'Free pick Hawthorn' & then again when the fixture was released yesterday. Despite the fact, we've got the 2nd most difficult draw of all clubs, with 8 x 6 day breaks.

It was bad enough when Robbo went after Sam for his 'jab' gesticulation, in an attempt to portray him as a serial 'kneer' as revenge; But this is getting beyond a joke.

I mean, when is this desperate attempt to cast Essendon's dark shadow over Hawthorn, going to end?

Attention Sam Landsbefger & the EFC: Jaeger O'Meara is a Hawk....Accept it, deal with it with dignity, & move on you salty pack of pricks.

 

[TazHawk15]

And you wonder why people think Hawthorn fans are dickheads...

You are reading it correctly folks an Essendon supporter posted this.

There are no bigger dickhead supporters in the AFL than the "Free Jimmy Hird" and "we are innocent" Flog Essendank fans.

 

[HeHateMe]

Didn't Burton have a (terrible) broken leg? I never heard anything about a knee injury with him.

He hyperextended his knee while landing after launching at the footy. Dislocated his knee cap, rupture his acl and snaped a bone.

Freak accident, there is actually a video of the incident.


Then returnes after two years out of the game and became best 22 after 3 strong performances, one as a forward, one as a wing and one as a defender.

 

[cryptor]

That's because in the AFL a patella tendon injury is an unknown variable given its rareness. The best data you could find would be studies done in America on the injury which is much more common in the NFL, and the numbers aren't pretty. On average it ended up that Patella tendon injuries had the worst recovery times, issues with muscle degradation, worst results for player performance after returning from injury, and a career expectancy of roughly 4 years after sustaining the injury. O'Meara has already been out for 2.
I know you said that Hawthorn have done their due dilligence, but if the reports are true that he failed medicals at 2 other clubs, it seems like Hawthorn is taking a massive gamble rather than working on sound medical advice.

Didn't Burton have a (terrible) broken leg? I never heard anything about a knee injury with him.

All true. But as you said, it's a rare injury. I don't think you can draw any conclusions from it. Hawthorn are backing themselves to get him right and given how dedicated he is to his body (he apparently weighs all his food) I think he's got the best chance.

 

[Apex36]

All true. But as you said, it's a rare injury. I don't think you can draw any conclusions from it. Hawthorn are backing themselves to get him right and given how dedicated he is to his body (he apparently weighs all his food) I think he's got the best chance.

For context, I said rare in the AFL. The stats are damning in the NFL where it's a more common injury.

 

[cryptor]

For context, I said rare in the AFL. The stats are damning in the NFL where it's a more common injury.

ACL injuries are far more common in the AFL, right? My understanding is that tendons and ligaments are very similar in structure and mostly vary in purpose (tendons connecting bone to muscle; ligaments connecting bone to bone) so I would think the treatment and rehab would be similar. ACLs used to be a career killer but in the past decade have improved dramatically to the point where a lot of players can get back to their best footy within 2 years of doing an ACL.

But like I've said. This is all theory. The stats you present are concerning but I weigh that up against the other stuff I've mentioned about Hawthorn and O'Meara. And at the end of the day we'll just have to sit back and see what happens.